Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), empowers individuals to address public nuisances and wrongful acts affecting the public through civil suits. This provision ensures that the community can seek legal remedies for actions detrimental to public welfare.
MEANING AND DEFINITION
While the CPC does not explicitly define “public nuisance,” Section 268 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) describes it as an act or omission causing common injury, danger, or annoyance to the public or people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity. Examples include:
- Obstruction of public highways,
- Pollution of public waterways, and
- Excessive noise from loudspeakers.
LEGAL PROVISIONS UNDER SECTION 91 CPC
Section 91 outlines the procedure for instituting suits related to public nuisances or other wrongful acts affecting the public:
-
Who May Sue:
- Advocate General: Authorized to file a suit without demonstrating special damage.
- Two or More Persons: With the court’s permission, even if no special damage is caused to them.
- Private Individuals: If they have sustained special damage, they can sue without needing the court’s leave.
-
Reliefs Available:
- Declaration: A formal statement establishing the rights of the parties involved.
- Injunction: A court order restraining the defendant from continuing the nuisance.
- Other Appropriate Relief: Any other remedy suitable to the circumstances of the case.
-
Scope of Application:
- The section applies to acts affecting or likely to affect the public, ensuring preventive measures can be taken.
PROCEDURE FOR INSTITUTING A SUIT
To file a suit under Section 91 CPC:
- Advocate General: May directly institute the suit.
- Two or More Persons: Must obtain the court’s leave by demonstrating a prima facie case of public nuisance or wrongful act.
The requirement for court permission acts as a safeguard against frivolous litigation.
CASE LAWS ILLUSTRATING SECTION 91 CPC
-
Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardichan (1980) 4 SCC 162:
- Facts: Residents of Ratlam filed a complaint about open drains and lack of sanitation causing health hazards.
- Issue: Whether the municipality is obligated to remove the public nuisance.
- Held: The Supreme Court directed the municipality to take immediate action, emphasizing that public nuisance is a challenge to social justice.
-
Mohinder Singh v. Surmukh Singh (2012):
- Facts: Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants’ construction obstructed a public way, causing inconvenience.
- Issue: Whether the suit is maintainable under Section 91 CPC without special damage.
- Held: The court held that even without special damage, a suit is maintainable under Section 91, provided the procedural requirements are met.
COMPARISON WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
In the United Kingdom, public nuisance is primarily addressed under common law and statutory provisions like the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Individuals can bring actions for public nuisance if they have suffered “special damage,” similar to the provisions under Indian law.
DEFENSES AND EXCEPTIONS
Defendants in public nuisance cases may raise defenses such as:
- Statutory Authority: If the act causing nuisance is authorized by law.
- Prescription: Long-term continuance of the act without objection may, in some cases, serve as a defense.
However, no length of time can legalize a public nuisance if it remains injurious to public rights.
REMEDIES AVAILABLE
Remedies against public nuisance include:
- Criminal Prosecution: Under Section 290 of the IPC, causing public nuisance is punishable.
- Magisterial Orders: Magistrates can order the removal of public nuisances under Sections 133 and 143 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
- Civil Suits: As per Section 91 CPC, for declarations, injunctions, or other appropriate reliefs.
CONCLUSION
Section 91 CPC serves as a vital tool for protecting public rights against nuisances and wrongful acts. It empowers both public officials and citizens to seek judicial intervention, ensuring that public welfare is upheld through legal means.
